Order from a Major Online Bookstore
Ultimate Book Price Comparison Engine
Save Your Time And Money
| AnyBook4Less.com | Order from a Major Online Bookstore |
|
| Home | Store List | FAQ | Contact Us | | ||
| Ultimate Book Price Comparison Engine Save Your Time And Money |
||
 |
Title: Kosovo and International Society by Alex J. Bellamy ISBN: 0-333-99260-1 Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan Pub. Date: 11 October, 2002 Format: Hardcover Volumes: 1 List Price(USD): $69.95 |
Average Customer Rating: 3 (3 reviews)
Rating: 2
Summary: Still flawed
Comment: I am honored that Mr Bellamy himself responded to my critique. Since, he commits (or repeats) several errors that are key to an understanding of this complicated issue, I offer a brief reply.
1. In March 1999, Ranta's report was released to a few EU-governments and to the ICTY (I don't know about "agencies"). Mr Bellamy may have had access to it too, but as far as I know the report is not available for the public, since it is part of an on-going trial. I would be delighted if it were otherwise.
Copies of the autopsy reports, however, were obtained by two German newsmagazines and a summary of them was made public in May 2001. They corroborate what I have stated.
2. I repeat that there is no proof that the dead "were unarmed civilians who HAD NOT fired weapons". The fact that there is no evidence for the opposite, i.e., that they HAD fired weapons, would be meaningful ONLY if the Finnish team had looked for such evidence. This did not happen, because too much time had passed (see p. 17.723-24 of the ICTY-transcript of Ranta's testimony in March 2003, in contrast to what Mr Bellamy and other adherents of the massacre-theory try to suggest).
3. I have found no evidence for an allegation that "the Serb authorities gave contradictory advice and hampered her work". What Ranta said, however, was this: "I wish to emphasise that the professional work at the autopsy theatres was very smooth regardless of the national origin of the experts, and we were able to conduct the autopsies very smoothly and in a very good professional spirit. And this also extended to the forensic investigators" (p. 17.757; see # 3 in my first comment)
4. Similarly, the claim that Ranta reaffirms "the victims of Racak were shot at close range" is not in her testimony. She was explicit about this point: "I wish to emphasise that I'm not an expert on ballistic, and in fact, I asked several experts on ballistics what they really consider a close range or short range, so the answers are very variable. So I think I refrain from any comment" (p. 17.727). So, I stand by my previous comment (see below, # 2).
I can only repeat that the author should have considered more carefully other, critical views. As it is, his position is untenable.
Rating: 5
Summary: Gockel's facts flawed
Comment: I don't know which version of the ICTY transcript Matthias Gockel read, but may I shed some light on what he wrote.
1. Ranta's report was released to governments, agencies and the ICTY itself
2. Ranta stated in her testimony that there was no evidence that the dead had fired weapons
3. Ranta not only called the paraffin test outdated she stated that she had never seen it used before in her professional career, so outdated and problematic it was.
4. In her testimony Ranta does say that the Serb authorities gave contradictory advice and hampered her work
5. She reaffirms her opinion expressed in an earlier article that the victims of Racak were shot at close range
I'm not sure which version of the transcripts Gockel was reading, but they do not bear out his version of events at Racak and support Bellamy's
3.
Rating: 2
Summary: A flawed book
Comment: There are many factual errors in this book.
I will mention only some of them, focusing on the chapter that deals with the events in Racak in January 1999 (pp. 114-120).
Helena Ranta never "released" her final report about Racak, as the author wrongly claims. On March 17, 1999, she gave a personal comment, but the report has not been made public.
Moreover, the author says that "seven key points" regarding the events have been established. But out of those seven points, five have not been proven at all.
1. "The dead were unarmed civilians who had not fired weapons." - There is simply no proof whatsoever for this claim. Ranta herself said in March 2000 that her original statement gave rise to misunderstandings. She said that she never made any tests to check if the dead had fired weapons, because too much time had passed when her team arrived in Kosovo. Even when you read her original statement, you will find that she does not claim the dead were unarmed but only says that there were no signs that they were not unarmed. The difference is small but grave (for more details see below, under 4.).
2. "KVM verifiers were correct to identify that many of the dead had been shot at very close range." - An article by three Finnish pathologists, published by the journal Forensic Science International in 2001, makes clear that only one person was shot at very close range and most of the bodies were shot at from various angles. This may indicate that they were killed in fighting. At the very least, it shows that they were not executed and that the claims of some KVM verifiers - especially of William Walker aka "Mr. Massacre" - were not correct.
3. "The Serbian pathologists concluded that there had been fabrication of evidence before they had conducted autopsies. The fact that the bodies were left unsupervised between 17 and 21 January increases the possibility that they had been moved and tampered with by the Serbs." - This is pure speculation. At no point, Ranta or anyone else from the Finnish team spoke about tampering with the bodies by the Serbs. It is not clear why the author uses such insinuation in a book that claims to be scientific.
4. "The Serb and Belarussioan pathologists used outdated methods and reached unsupported conclusions." - The only point of contention was the so-called paraffin-test, which was used by the Serbs to test for gunshot residue. Ranta called it outdated. Apart from this criticism, she said that the cooperation was excellent and did not utter a single word of criticism, not even when she was testifying at the Hague in March 2003 (after the book was published).
5. "The Serbs had actively obstructed the ICTY investigation." - This is a wild exaggeration. The only instance of obstruction occurred when the "Tribunal"-prosecutor Louise Arbour was not allowed to enter the country without a visa. This might have been bad for PR-purposes, but legally Belgrade's position was rock solid. However that may be, the forensic teams, who stood after all at the center of the investigation, did not utter a single word about obstruction from the Serbs.
It is possible that the author was misled on points 4 and 5 by a report from the "Society for threatened peoples", which he cites as one of his sources. The reports from this society have a long, proven history of using unsubstantiated rumours to paint the Serbs in a negative light.
In general, the author makes the mistake to rely exclusively on material that supports the massacre-of-unarmed-civilians theory. It is clear that he does not take serious the criticis of this theory. His mistakes are especially damning, since he thinks he is convinced to have debunked the arguments of criticis of this theory (which he calls "the conspiracy theory").
There is a lesson to be learned from this: if you argue for a theory that is as one-sided as this one and claim that the other side is merely engaged in a "conspiracy theory", make sure at least to have the facts straight.
One could say more about the book, but this much must suffice. I am certain, knowledgable readers easily spot other mistakes. I would also recommend that you read the transcripts of the Hague trial against Slobodan Milosevic, especially the parts dealing with the recent history of Kosovo (the Kosovo section went from February until July 2002).
Thank you for visiting www.AnyBook4Less.com and enjoy your savings!
Copyright� 2001-2021 Send your comments
